Guide to Law of Attraction, Part 1: 4 Ways of Deliberate Manifestation

By understanding the four basic ways in which we can use the Law of Attraction to our advantage, we can increase our chances of successfully manifesting the things we truly want, and also minimize our chances of inadvertently manifesting the things that we do not want.

In this article I am describing the four basic scenarios that a student of the Law of Attraction can use to create a better life for himself or herself.

Another feature of this article is a detailed discussion on terminology. Unlike most books on the Law of Attraction, I am here standardizing the terminology of the art of manifesting, in order to create a more systematic account of the different scenarios of manifestation.

This will, I think, give the reader a better theoretical foundation, and also give him or her a better intuitive sense of the powerful possibilities of the Law of Attraction.

I am convinced that if we only can get to know these four scenarios better, we will be much more prone to create more of the things that we do desire, and less of the things that we don’t desire.

This article is the first one in a planned series of “Guide to Law of Attraction” posts. My aim is to, in the first instance, to produce at least three other articles in this series, which will describe each of three main scenarios in more detail (i.e., Scenarios 1-3).

PART 1: MOTIVATION

Why should we, at all, care about the Law of Attraction? What is so special about it? What can it do for us?

The Basic Principle

The basic principle of the Law of Attraction is that “like attracts like”. So if we only can “steer” our thoughts in a more good-feeling direction, the Law of Attraction will bounce back to us other thoughts that match those feelings. So the better we feel, the better it gets.

And since thoughts have “creation power”, thoughts also materialize into physical things. So not only does the Law of Attraction send us more good-feeling thoughts (if our own thoughts are feeling good to us, that is); it also sends us good-feeling things.

Note, however, that the Law of Attraction also works the other way. So if our thoughts feel bad to us, then the Law of Attraction will send us more bad-feeling thoughts. This is why a situation such as a depression or severe anxiety may be so hard to escape from, especially for those who do not know about the principles of the Law of Attraction.

Creating Deliberately, or by Default?

Law of Attraction is a general principle that is the basis not only of our physical Universe, but applies to all creation, physical and non-physical.

This principle, or law, is not optional, for it is always operational. So just as gravitation always is at work for everyone, Law of Attraction also is at work for everyone, at any point in time or space. [note 1]

Contrary to gravitation, however, the Law of Attraction can be “used” in different ways. By understanding how the Law of Attraction operates, the student can “work around” some of the obstacles that it might create.

So the choice is yours: Are you like most people, letting the Law of Attraction have its way with you because you are not aware of its existence (i.e., you are creating “by default”)?

Or are you one of those people who can feel the “wonderfulness” of the idea that it is in your own power to create a superb life for yourself? And that the road to that fantastic life experience is determined only by your willingness to steer your thoughts, little by little, into a more positive place (i.e., deliberate creation)?

Deliberate Creation: You Can Do It!

Because you are already using the Law of Attraction from the moment you were born, you have already seen its effects. But perhaps you, with most people, did not know about the Law of Attraction itself?

No worries. That was then, and this is now. Anyone who has used the Law of Attraction and created “by default” can also learn to create deliberately.

It just takes practice and an eagerness to really want to establish that delightful feeling of “Everything always work out for me!”

PART 2: TERMINOLOGY

Before we really get going with the core material, let us here in Part 2 discuss some of the basic concepts that we need in Part 3 and onward.

Object

Let us first discuss the term “object” itself. What do I mean by that?

When I talk about an “object” in this article, in connection with the terms WObject and UObject, I refer to many different things.

An “object” can be an external physical object, such as a chair, or a car, or a cat. But it can also be an internal physical object, such as one’s own liver, or brain, etc.

In addition, an “object” might also refer to fine-physical things such as a thought, a feeling, a condition, a circumstance, a situation, or an event, etc.

Abraham-Hicks summarize (some of) the possible “deliverables” of the Law of Attraction in this way (Ask and It Is Given, p. 42; my square brackets):

Note especially here that we all may have a habitual dominant vibration “as a whole”, which, we might say, reflects our general mood. But that is not, in my opinion, what they mean in that quote.

Instead, what they are referring to is a habitual dominant vibration on that very subject that you have practiced your attention to.

This means that for each possible topic (or subject) we focus on, there is a corresponding possible manifestation. And your success in manifesting depends on your particular habitual dominant vibration for each of those topics.

So you might be very positive in regard to topic A, and very negative in regard to topic B, but neutral or disinterested in regard to topic C. It all depends on each topic. And your manifestations will always reflect that.

WObject vs UObject (1)

Now let us return to the terms WObject and UObject.

In order to describe the Law of Attraction arithmetic as clearly and concisely as possible, I would like to introduce the terms WObject and UObject.

The term WObject is short for “Wanted Object”. This is the object that one wants, and one’s hope and desire is that it will show up as a real manifestation in one’s own life experience (whether it’s gross physical, or fine-physical).

The term UObject is short for “Unwanted Object”. This is the object that one does not want, and one’s hope and desire is that it will not show up as a real manifestation in one’s own life experience (whether it’s gross physical, or fine-physical).

WObject vs UObject (2)

Another reason why I am consistently using “WObject” and “UObject” is because I want to avoid to talk about examples of “unwanted things”.

By using “UObject” instead of giving an example of an unwanted thing, I decrease the likelihood that the essence of such an example will enter into either your consciousness or mine.

And if I use that tactic regarding “UObject”, it would be inconsistent to use examples in the case of “WObject”, even though commonly desired things (such as cars, condos, and Caribbean cruises) might be much less likely to negatively influence one’s manifestation situation, since so many people want them.

Therefore, in this article, I am consistently using “WObject” and “UObject”, without using matching examples.

NObject

The term NObject is short for “Neutral Object”. This is an object that one has a neutral opinion of, and therefore thinks nothing of.

So there is no desire in relation to an NObject: it is neither wanted (so it’s not a WObject) nor unwanted (so it’s not a UObject).

Which Word for “Materializing”?

Since different authors use different terms for “materializing” when they speak about the Law of Attraction, the question is: Which word should we choose, in an attempt to “standardize” the vocabulary? Should we use “materializing” or “actualizing” or “manifesting” or “creating”? Or some other word?

The choice of this word is not only important for its own sake. For, as the reader will see below, all the three main scenarios of the Law of Attraction contain that base word (whatever we decide it is).

The short story is that I have chosen the word “manifesting” (and “manifestation”) as a representative of the idea of physical “materialization”.

I have two main reasons for this. One reason is that, among the authoritative non-physical sources of the theory of the Law of Attraction, the Abraham-Hicks material not only has the most consistent use of the term “manifestation” and “manifesting”, but it is also the most recent one, and the more popular one, compared to the Seth material. [note 2]

Another reason is that also other “ordinary” (i.e., not non-physical) authors use this term. For example, the hugely popular The Secret repeatedly talks about “manifestation” and “manifesting”: “It takes no time for the Universe to manifest what you want” (p. 68); “A shortcut to manifesting your desires is to see what you want as absolute fact” (p. 175).

Manifestation (1)

So now that we have chosen the word “manifestation” as a representative of the idea of “materialization” and “actualization”, let us have a brief discussion about its different forms.

There are basically three variants of the word “manifestation” that are typically used in the Abraham-Hicks material: “manifestation”, “manifest”, and “manifesting”.

Let’s start with the noun “manifestation”. According to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, that word has four main meanings, with the first one being the most relevant to our discussion here on the Law of Attraction (Little 1973, p. 1272a): [notes 3, 4, and 5]

This Oxford definition can be understood in several ways. But my interpretation of it is that the editors are here pointing to two core things.

First, by saying “The action of manifesting” they are talking about manifestation as an act, or a process. And by saying “an instance of this; hence, that by which something is manifested”, they are presumably referring to a particular instance of such an action or process.

Second, by saying “the fact of being manifested” they are supposedly referring to the state of “having been materialized”.

Manifestation (2)

So when we now look at uses of these meanings in the Abraham-Hicks material, we can easily find the word “manifestation” being used as a word for the process, or action, or act, of manifestation or materialization (Ask and It Is Given, p. 215; my square brackets):

Similarly, the word “manifestation” is also commonly used in the Abraham-Hicks corpus to point to the result (or end state) of an attempt to materialize a physical object, as in this example (The Law of Attraction, p. 98):

Manifestation (3)

The noun “manifestation” also have sister forms such as “manifest” and “manifesting”. So let us first take a look at the word “manifest”.

Manifest (verb). The verb “manifest” can be used in two ways: either in an intransitive way where there is no mentioning of the type of object one wants to manifest (“to manifest”); or in a transitive way, where there is also a mentioning of the type of object one wants to manifest, placed immediately after it (“to manifest something”).

Abraham-Hicks uses “manifest” in an intransitive way in many different places. One example is from The Law of Attraction (p. 98):

It is, however, rare that Abraham-Hicks uses “manifest” in a transitive way. In the overwhelming majority of cases they only use it in an intransitive way. Nevertheless, there are a few places where we find it, as in this example from The Astonishing Power of Emotions (p. 258; emphasis in the original text):

Manifest (adjective). The word “manifest” can also be an adjective. It is many times used in a construction such as “It is manifest.” (Or, using the synonym “manifested” instead: “It is manifested.”)

There are no places in the Abraham-Hicks material (i.e., in their six main books) where they themselves use the word “manifest” as an adjective. But Neale Donald Walsch uses it, in his Foreword to their The Law of Attraction (p. xiii):

Manifestation (4)

Another sister form of “manifestation” is “manifesting”. This is a present participle. And just as in the case of the verb “manifest”, the participle “manifesting” can be used both in an intransitive and transitive way.

Abraham-Hicks use the participle “manifesting” in an intransitive way in many places. One example is from Money, and the Law of Attraction, where they say (p. 205):

But in the case of a transitive usage, there are not many passages to be found in the standard Abraham-Hicks material (i.e., in their six main books). Nevertheless, one rare example is found in Ask and It Is Given (p. 215):

Also Seth uses the participle “manifesting” in a transitive way in very few places. Here is one example from The Nature of Personal Reality (p. 190; emphasis in the original text):

Nonmanifestation

Since “manifestation” is the main word that we selected as the standard term for “materialization” and “actualization”, our job hereon is relatively simple. Now we just add the prefix “non” to come up with another noun that will serve as the “opposite” of the end state of a manifestation. [note 6]

1. Nonmanifestation (noun). So we have two meanings of the word “nonmanifestation”. The first meaning is as a state, where nothing is manifest.

The second meaning is as an act, or action, or process. The act or process of nonmanifestation produces an end state of “nonmanifestation”. And that process also begins with a state of “nonmanifestaton”.

In other words, the act or process of “nonmanifestation” goes from one nonmanifested state to another.

Here is my example of using the noun “nonmanifestation”:

2. Nonmanifest (verb). The meaning of this verb is derived from nonmanifestation as an act or process. So whatever beginning and end states the act of “nonmanifestation” refers to, that is meant when we use the verb “to nonmanifest”.

Since the end state is “nonmanifestation”, this verb is not used in a transitive way, only in an intransitive way.

My own example of an intransitive usage of “nonmanifest” is this:

3. Nonmanifesting (participle). In a similar vein to the verb “nonmanifest”, the participle only should be used in an intransitive way.

My own example of an intransitive usage of “nonmanifesting” is this:

4. Nonmanifest, nonmanifested (adjective). There are two adjectives that may be used to signal the state of “nonmanifestation”: nonmanifest and nonmanifested.

My own example of the adjective “nonmanifest” is this:

Demanifestation

Similarly to the case of “nonmanifestation”, we just add the prefix “de” to “manifestation”, to produce another noun that will serve as a word for the “reverse” of the process of manifestation.

1. Demanifestation (noun). So we have two meanings of the word “demanifestation”. The first meaning is as an act, or action, or process, which is the process of manifestation “in reverse”.

The second meaning is as an end state, where nothing is manifest.

Note that the “content” of the state of “demanifestation” is just as empty as the “content” of the state of “nonmanifestation”.

Technically speaking, however, these are two different states that are revealing not just their particular “content” (in both cases, a non-existence of a particular object), but also in which process they belong (i.e., whether they are the end result of the demanifesting process, or the end result of the nonmanifesting process).

Here is my example of using the noun “demanifestation”:

2. Demanifest (verb). The meaning of this verb is derived from demanifestation as an act or process. So whatever beginning and end states the act of “demanifestation” refers to, that is the action meant when we use the verb “to demanifest”.

Since the beginning state is a state with an existing object (the UObject), this verb is used both in an intransitive and transitive way.

An example of an intransitive use might be:

And here is an example of a transitive use:

3. Demanifesting (participle). Just as in the case of the verb “to demanifest”, the present participle “demanifesting” can be used either in an intransitive way or in a transitive way.

Here is an example of using the participle “demanifesting” in an intransitive way:

And here is another transitive example of mine:

4. Demanifest, demanifested (adjective). There are two adjectives that may be used to signal the state of “demanifestation”: demanifest and demanifested.

An example of the adjective “demanifest” is this:

PART 3: THE FOUR SCENARIOS

In this third part of the article the topic is the three possible manifestation scenarios that any “serious” student of the Law of Attraction should know about, and practice.

What Do We Want?

My first, important, point is that WObjects must be treated completely differently than UObjects. And NObjects should be treated differently than both WObjects and UObjects.

This means, practically speaking, that it is essential for all students of the Law of Attraction to know, on the one hand, exactly which objects they desire, and, on the other hand, exactly which objects they do not desire. But also which objects that they are neutral about.

And depending on whether they desire an object, or don’t desire it, they will have to choose one of the three main scenarios. Scenario 1 involves only WObjects, while both Scenario 2 and Scenario 3 involve only UObjects.

And if it is an NObject, Scenario 4 should be applied.

The Four Scenarios

There are four scenarios that the student of Law of Attraction needs to know about. The following figure illustrates the thought process of how to handle different situations by choosing different scenarios (click image to enlarge):

The first scenario is “Manifesting WObjects”, where the challenge is to materialize a WObject that previously did not exist.

The second scenario is “Nonmanifesting UObjects”, where the challenge is to avoid materializing a UObject.

The third scenario is “Demanifesting UObjects”, where the challenge is to dematerialize (or un-materialize) an already existing UObject.

The fourth scenario is “Ignoring NObjects”, where the main action is simply to do nothing.

Scenario 1: Manifesting WObjects

In Scenario 1 the challenge is to manifest a WObject that does not yet exist in the physical realm.

Thus, from a situation of a non-existence (i.e., lack, or absence) of a particular WObject, the goal is to produce a future situation where there is an existence (i.e., non-lack, or presence) of such a WObject.

The following figure illustrates the basic idea of the “Manifesting WObjects” scenario (click image to enlarge):

Going from a non-existence to an existence of a particular WObject is called “manifesting”. The initial state is called a “nonmanifestation”, and the end state (i.e., the result) of this process is called a “manifestation”.

The state of manifestation refers to a WObject that is either fine-physical or gross physical. Fine-physical manifestations can be, say, thoughts and feelings; and gross physical manifestations may be such things as bicycles, dollar bills, and billiard balls.

Scenario 1 is, in my opinion, the least challenging of the three scenarios.

Note, though, that I am not saying that it is, in an absolute sense, easy or simple, especially for a beginner. I am just saying that, relatively speaking, the challenges presented in Scenario 1 are typically less demanding than those in Scenario 2 and Scenario 3.

Scenario 2: Nonmanifesting UObjects

For UObjects there are two different challenges. The first type of challenge is found in Scenario 2.

Here the goal is to (continuously and indefinitely) avoid manifesting a UObject that does not yet exist in the fine-physical or gross physical realm.

The following figure illustrates the basic idea of the “Nonmanifesting UObjects” scenario (click image to enlarge):

This second scenario is more challenging than the first scenario. However, it is less challenging that the third scenario.

Scenario 3: Demanifesting UObjects

The second type of challenge for a UObject is found in Scenario 3.

Here the goal is to be able to de-manifest a UObject that already does exist in the physical realm (whether it is of fine-physical or gross physical nature).

The following figure illustrates the basic idea of the “Demanifesting UObjects” scenario (click image to enlarge):

This third scenario is typically more challenging than both the first scenario and the second scenario.

Scenario 4: Ignoring NObjects

The fourth scenario is called “Ignoring NObjects”. Here the goal is basically to do nothing at all. Since our presumed value judgment about an NObject is that it is uninteresting and harmless and nothing to focus on, we are care-free in regard to its possible manifestation, nonmanifestation, or demanifestation.

The following figure illustrates the basic idea of the “Ignoring NObjects” scenario (click image to enlarge):

So the real challenge in regard to Scenario 4 lies mainly not in the process itself (“doing nothing at all”), but in the value judgment that precedes it: Is the object in question really an NObject? Or might it in reality be a burgeoning WObject or UObject for me?

CONCLUSION

Any type of object that we may think of may be evaluated in three ways: It may be a WObject that we like and therefore want; it may be a UObject that we don’t like and therefore do not want; and it may be an NObject that we are neutral about, and therefore neither want or not want.

If it’s a WObject, then we use Scenario 1: Manifesting WObjects.

If it’s a UObject, and it is not already manifested in the physical world, we use Scenario 2: Nonmanifesting UObjects.

If it’s a UObject, and it already is manifested in the physical world, we use Scenario 3: Demanifesting UObjects.

If it’s an NObject, we use Scenario 4: Ignoring NObjects.

Chris Bocay

NOTES

1. Another similarity between the operation of gravitation and Law of Attraction is that although they both are at work at all times, and at all locations on Earth, their force is not equally strong everywhere. In fact, recent empirical research on gravity confirms not only a general, “smooth” variance in gravity (with less gravity at the equator and more gravity at the poles), but that there are “unexpected locations with more extreme differences”, such as Mount Nevado Huascarán in Peru (Aron 2013). In relation to the Law of Attraction, Seth mentions the idea that physical manifestation is of different intensity at different locations around the globe: “If you happen to live in an area where the coordinate environment is strong . . .” (Seth Speaks, pp. 66-67).
2. The words “manifestation”, “manifesting” and “to manifest” are easily located in almost any of the six main books by Abraham-Hicks, and also occur in many of the Seth books. The difference is just that in the Seth material those words are mostly not used in the exact same way as in the Abraham-Hicks material. In some places, though, there is a near synonymity: Seth says in The Nature of Personal Reality: “the exterior world is the manifestation of the interior one” (p. 417); and, in another place in that same book, he talks about “the manifestation of aggressive feelings” (p. 203). However, a somewhat more direct synonym to Abraham-Hicks’s notion of “manifestation” is Seth’s term “actualization”, as mentioned in, for example, Seth Speaks: “Your thoughts and emotions begin their journey into physical actualization at the moment of conception” (p. 66). And Seth says in the second volume of The “Unknown” Reality: “other conditions operate that can slow down an idea’s physical actualization” (p. 432). Seth also sometimes uses the term “materialization” in conjunction with, or as a synonym to, “actualization”.
3. There is also another main meaning in that SOED entry that is partly relevant. The third main item reads (Little 1973, p. 1272a): “3. Spiritualism. A phenomenon by which the presence of a spirit is supposed to be rendered perceptible 1853.” This meaning is relevant in the sense that it is the perception of an object that is the main common denominator in all types of (fine-physical and gross physical) manifestations. So the general term “manifestation” not only includes gross physical manifestations, but also fine-physical ones, such as thoughts, feelings, and emotions. So the appearance of a ghost during a seance might be called an example of a fine-physical manifestation, since it has no gross physical reality. Note, however, that the third main item is not relevant in the sense of “what the overwhelming majority of people are using manifestation for”. That is, most people are not interested in manifesting ghosts; they are much more interested in gross physical manifestations such as cars, mansions, and soulmates.
4. The entry in the Fiftieth Anniversary edition of the American Heritage Dictionary is helpful in various ways in order to understand the many possible meanings of the noun “manifestation”. It confirms that the two meanings that I am speaking of are: “1a. The act of manifesting. b. The state of being manifested.” (Pickett 2018, p. 1067b). But there are also other meanings in that AHD entry that are relevant. I may decide to write a separate article to expand on these matters.
5. Other dictionaries with entries on “manifestation” that are helpful are: Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary (Marckwardt 1966, pp. 774c-775a), and Webster’s New World Dictionary (Guralnik 1978, p. 862a).
6. In order to keep the main article as compact as possible, I have avoided discussing all the alternatives to “nonmanifestation”. The alternatives that I have dismissed, in the case of reading “manifestation” only as a state, are the following: “non-existence” (with hyphen) and “nonexistence” (without hyphen); “non-being” (with hyphen), and “nonbeing (without hyphen); “not-being” (with hyphen), and “notbeing (without hyphen). Another alternative that I have discarded is the noun “unmanifestation”, since it is not to be found in any of the major dictionaries (although other forms such as “unmanifest” and “unmanifested” have been in use for centuries; see Trumble 2002, p. 3410a);

REFERENCES

NOTE: All links are clean (i.e. NOT affiliate links).

---